After reading through this artical it made me think of alot more then i did before about how the whole game making processed works, i guess becase no one realy talks about this kind of stuff.
What im talking about is the rest of the important stuff, not just good programing, features, artstyle and an idea. Like trying to make peoples short term memory degrade so they find your game funner over and over by using difernt colours and sounds, or using reds for exitment and blues for relaxation.
Just wondering if there is anything else like this? even if there is a best way to have the menu setup?
I think this part of game development is often compleatly overlooked by Indie devs, so i think a cluster of information on this would be great
yep you are right rest of stuff is more important because they help to look great and help to attract players to play programming has it own importance because if your graphics and other stuff is so cool but the functionality is not working properly then what the use of graphics?
Nice article.
This is what game design is really about. Rather than “I like zombies, lets put zombies in a game”, its thinking about “How will people play this?”,“What will they be thinking when they do?”, “How can we make it fun for them?”
When people first started looking at “user centred” design they tried to put together long lists of recommendations which were just like you describe in terms of the best way to design menus and so on. These are OK, up to a point but there’s no substitute for a lot of testing with your target audience.
If you really want to learn about game design, try designing a really simple game for someone you know, who doesn’t like the same things as you. Then get them to test a prototype and tell you what they’re thinking. Then build another prototype and try again. You’ll learn a huge amount about how people approach games and what is important to them.
Or you could read some books. “The Art of Game design” by Jesse Schell is one of the best. Or you could try “A Theory of fun for game design” by Raph Koster. I haven’t found any game design books which take a more cognitive approach, so if anyone has a recommendation I’d be interested to hear of it.
Well, i don’t think so. There are tons of examples how very successful games were developed completely different. Interestingly the iterative stumbling process you described for instance breed games like Populous. I think you can learn about possible options from such books but in the end it much more depends on your personal style, your talent, the scale of the project and so on. What surprised me once i learned about it was how stringent easy looking Japanese games were designed. Sometimes it feels better not knowing what went on behind and just enjoy the magic or doing things in a intuitive way on your own. Anyway, many roads lead to …
Sure, but if you really want to get an insight into how players who haven’t been involved in the game creation process will see your game then nothing beats watching them play your prototype. You can also learn a lot by trying to make a game which appeals to someone else rather than just yourself.
On the other hand, if you just want to practice your art or your programming then its a lot easier to make a game just for yourself
@Harissa
The only thing that counts in the end is if the game is fun or not.
And this goal can be achieved by many different ways. Again, a possible best approach depends on the specific situation. There are projects were you definately want to go through several stages of growing open Betas but there are also games where this doesn’t add much at all and can cause quite the opposite effect, so your last statement sounds more dumb than wise to me.
But as such books and smart advices are available since years by now, we’re looking into a bright future where a increasing number of people will be making more and better games, so amazingly good that at some point they will be forbidden by law because people get hooked instantly just by playing through the tutorials. Some people will be making lots of money by still producing and selling them through a black market, the rest will get some replacement drugs like heroin from the health authorities (surprisingly, in some countries such institutions still exist) and a growing movement will show up where developers intend to return to their roots, ignoring all the wise tipps and developing more old skool inspired crappy games again.
Another great book is ‘A Theory of Fun for Game Designers’ by Raph Koster. And in the school of get it straight from the source, a must topic is ‘Flow - the psychology of optimal experience’ by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Lots of people have written about Flow, including me. Google or read blogs, but you absolutely, positively, must understand flow.
Not necessarily, your goal may be to make money, or to inspire deep emotions. Even “engaging” doesn’t always mean fun.
I wouldn’t consider Farmville to be particularly fun, but its easy to play, has social connections, etc. This makes it quite engaging.
Jetpack Joyride is another one that springs to mind. I don’t think its particularly fun, yet the sense of progression and the desire to complete the achievements make it quite engaging.
The article, though quite complex to wrap my head around, was very interesting. Was that much attention to detail and planning really used in a mobile app?
Ive been trying to think about these things on my game Pillar Snake, i think i have acheved a cupple of the points:
1# My games very simple
2# I dont think thats a good point
3# Achived i have a simple scoring system that tells the highest score and your score
5# My game gets harder the more you play due to the tail getting longer.
